Re: Array rvals, lvals and dimension

> Do we even need to bother with dimarr anymore ? Since we are only
> subscripting one index at a time I think we can lose it and just store
> a local 'index' value. That will save us from having to clean up the
> memory later and speed up the interpreter in cases when the number of
> array accesses is high.

Yeah, that was only intermediate stuff. But intermediate solutions tend t=
o be=20
definitive ... so I'm better clean it now ...

Stefano